UAI covers (or will) everything (JDAMS, LGB, JSWO, JASSM, Dumb bombs, SDB, etc).
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.
Is this opening post up-to-date ?
No, it's not, TMor.
It doesn't mention the post MDC software drops on Tranche 1, for example (Drop 3 is now flying, drop 2 is on service aircraft).
It doesn't mention CORP.
And much of the Tranche 2/3 stuff is just plain wrong. Tranche 2 never flew with SRP 4, but started with 5.0 and is now on 5.1, and is about to go to SRP 10.
Don't get me wrong. Scorpion did a great job on this and I applaud him for it, but things have moved on, and at the moment in particular, things are moving very rapidly indeed.
The exact content of SRP10 (P1EA) and SRP12 (P1EB) is hard to pin down, as P1EA includes more than 40% more than was originally contracted (some of it pulled forward from P1EB) and P1EB also has 'as much' new content.
EF GmbH apparently don't want to talk about P1E until Farnborough.
Beyond P1E, all bets are off, as the Saudi programme and Contract One seem to be ushering in a whole new way of integrating new kit on the aircraft outside the grindingly slow quadrinational SRP release process. This promises to erode Rafale's weapons integration advantage pretty quickly.
I'm still working on a comprehensive update, but I'm rather buisy these days. It will take some time, albeit I'm close to it.
Thank you Jack.
I feel I should add that my approch is sincere (nothing to do with Rafale). It's in fact very hard to 'know' the Typhoon since its upgrades seems to change all the time...
That's why I asked Scorpion about his message. But, hey, Scorpion, don't worry ! This is not very important to me. It's only a hobby
It seems that 1500L external droppable fuel tank will never be carried by Typhoon.
The truth usually between two extremes, the key is when and where.
For A/G, whether they would be designed for supersonic performance or not is hardly a concern, for the same amount of fuel and with less drag and two extra stations one would be much better off with Conformal Fuel Tanks. The latter are the way to go in my opinion.
A different/new nose fitted to a particular Typhoon at BAE Systems Warton.
Thanks to Falcon001 from Fighter Control.
Trials for the Captor-E maybe?
Interesting photos, the new nose cone has what looks like a fixture for a pitot tube although one isn't fitted, and the blue patch on the side looks to be covering something, possibly a sensor head or opening for a cooling duct ?
I think that it is unlikely that this new nosecone has been fitted for radar trials, given the fixture and the apertures on the side I would say that the nose probably isn't even housing any radar but rather flight test instrumentation. My money would be on this being used for flight envelope expansion if it weren't for the lack of any actual pitot tube and the pair of ASRAAM being carried.
Does anybody know if ZJ700 actually flew that day ?
Last edited by bloodshot; 22nd April 2012 at 18:38.
Don't think it flew, however ZJ700 is IPA5 and is the aircraft that is supposed to e conducting trials of the AESA
Cheers Giblets, I just noticed the last post from trembler1 on that thread which seems to agree with that.
Perhaps just fit testing for the new radar then ?
The nosecone looks like those that where fitted to the DA's for flight testing, which were not functional radomes as they were constructed of aluminium and were used purely for carrying flight instrumentation AFAIK.
I guess this could be due to a number of different things;
testing a radome that would be required for the AESA, most of the earlier reports stated that an AESA would be flying in 'the 2013 timeframe', so this could just be testing a few designs and if it affects handling, airflow etc at all.
Alternatively, BAe and Eurofighter might be pushing the date forward, especially with the feedback from foreign sales around needing a clear AESA and development programe. To have one flying would pretty much clear that one up
Personally I've never heard of anything recently, or the past few months even, about trials with the Captor-E actually fitted to Typhoon around this current time, i.e. early '12. Quite the opposite in fact given various snippets.
Trembler1's post on Fighter Control makes sense and may indeed compliment what Giblets' theory about the date being pushed forward due to foreign interest. Most notably South Korea.
Minus the red intake cover, its the first time I've seen other covers on various vents etc in blue. Others I've seen have been red. And some on places I wouldn't expect. Odd, to me at least.
Looks like the red covers are German/ italian, have looked at a few images, and would appear the Germans have specially made covers, and BAe commonly use the blue tape during maintenance, I guess this shows the kind of work they have been doing on the airframe, not just sticking on a new nosecone:
Last edited by Giblets; 22nd April 2012 at 21:16.
If it weren't for the features seen on the radome I would say that testing of a new radar Captor-E or possibly even Bright Adder would seem the most logical explanation.
If you look at photo's of the DA's you will see that the nosecone fitted with AOA/pitot boom was only used for flight testing and was exchanged with a normal radome at all other times.
That doesn't necessarily mean that the new radome isn't associated with testing of the radar though as the increased weight and shift in the CG may have been significant enough to have required qualification through a series of flight trials before testing of the radar itself could begin.
Last edited by bloodshot; 22nd April 2012 at 22:29.
The red covers are the same that are used by all the operators, and the clear blue wraps are normally used to temporarily cover open or unfinished areas during production. I'm not much of a spotter but perhaps IPA5 has been under wraps for a while undergoing the necessary modifications and this is just the first time she's been wheeled back out of the hangar ?
Last edited by bloodshot; 22nd April 2012 at 22:24.
Apparantly, the first image of Typhoon's HUD to be released: With an F-16 in it's crosshairs;
I wouldn't want to speak for Bloodshot, but I think he meant to say:
This aircraft (IPA5) was always expected to be one of the Quadrinational CAPTOR-E testbeds, whereas we’d expected Bright Adder to be tested on BT025 or BT026.If it weren't for the features seen on the radome I would say that the most logical explanation would be testing of a new radar. This radar could be CAPTOR-E or possibly even Bright Adder.
Bright Adder is notionally a technology demonstrator (for advanced AESA capabilities required by the UK, thought to include Electronic Attack), nothing more, though in fact it could stand as the basis for a production radar, and therefore is a de facto insurance policy.
There seems little doubt that Bright Adder is more developed than CAPTOR-E. It’s flying on a rotary wing testbed, and elements of it are also flying on a Piper Navajo, and probably still on the Tornado TREV (the original ARTS testbed). Whereas EF GmbH are still issuing press releases about the Quadrinational AESA describing how pilots like what they’ve been shown about CAPTOR-E in the simulator.
There have also been suggestions that the requirement for Bright Adder was more advanced and more demanding than that for CAPTOR-E, so it may be that Bright Adder is more advanced as well as more developed.
It is, however, a UK programme, so were it to become the basis for CAPTOR-E, the Germans (for example), who like to think that they lead the Quadrinational radar effort, might be just a little miffed.
Now, I may not know much but my understanding was that Bright Adder was a study of how to implement Electronic Attack with a Typhoon AESA rather than a radar in itself.
Have I got completely the wrong end of the stick?
Edit- Thanks Jackonicko for clearing that up, I was partially right then. If true, a more advanced AESA with offensive potential as a driving requirement is as exportable as SPECTRA with cloaking device
Last edited by mrmalaya; 27th April 2012 at 09:34.
Because Bright Adder was already pretty far advanced when the Quadrinational AESA programme lumbered into life, I get the feeling that its remit was widened. It offered the opportunity to get an early look at the repositioner and at other AESA features, long before the Quadrinational programme could provide flying hardware. And for the Brits, Bright Adder started to look like an excellent insurance policy if the Quadrinational programme faltered, or if it looked as though it would not deliver the capabilities required by the UK.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)